Sunday, July 31, 2016

Something
went wrong as can happen in a covert mission; the mission was scrubbed.
Casualties occurred with as many as three Special Force troopers killed.Deveraux wrote that the interior of the plane
was engulfed in flames almost immediately after take-off at Gander,
the apparent consequences of two bomb components: one containing an explosive
incendiary triggers adjacent to a second holding a napalm-like substances.The remote detonation instantly ignited and
spread ad deadly conflagration throughout the body of the aircraft.”Deveraux sources suggested that soda cans
“placed next to each other among cases of soft drinks” contained the incendiary
trigger and napalm-like substance.The
crew and troopers on the aircraft never had a chance.This has to be one of the most horrible cases
of cold-blooded murder of innocent Americans in the 20th Century.[i]

US Special Forces Mission, Not Repeat Israeli Bombing

The
US government offered to use Special Forces to destroy an Iraqi nuclear weapons
research facility.This was a CIA/NSC
inspired operation in conjunction with Israeli intelligence, according to
Deveraux.The Israelis had planned to
use aircraft to bomb the Iraqi facility like the successful Operation Opera
carried out on June 7, 1982, which destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor under
construction 17 kilometers southeast of Baghdad.But, US officials objected and suggested that
US ground forces deploy nuclear backpacks to destroy the facility. Deveraux
said there was intense disagreement within the CIA over the covert operation.[ii]

The Israelis were extremely nervous about Saddam Husseinacquiring a nuclear weapon and using it on
them.The Iran–Iraq War (1980 - 1988)
was on-going; the US was supplying HAWK and TOW missiles to Iran as part of the
secret Iran/Contra guns-for-hostages’ exchange; the use of Israelis IDF forces
to destroy the Iraqi facility endangered the guns-for-hostages exchange and
increased the risk of an expanded Middle East war.The easy answer for some aggressive covert
operators was to use Special Forcesto deploy nuclear backpacks and blame the
Iraqis for blowing-up their own facility.

However, this would have been the
first use of a nuclear weapon since WW II and there was a major disagreement
within the CIAover the use of US forces to deploy a nuclear
weapon to destroy the Iraqi facility. There was no Presidential Finding
supporting the mission but the CIA/NSC ‘cowboys’ proceeded on their own
authority, according to Deveraux.The
mission was aborted and a number of Special Forces killed. A number of
disgruntled Special Forces were on Arrow Air 1285 with a nuclear backpack. The
CIA‘cowboys’ were ordered to destroy the aircraft
with the disgruntled Special Forcesteam on it, according to both Don Deverauxand Charles Byers.

EOD TEAM FOUND CIA TEAM AT GANDER

An Explosive Ordinance Team (EOD)team from Andrews AFB flew to Ganderthe same day as the crash and were told to use
their nuclear protection gear, according to the Don Deveraux.They were told to treat the crash site “as a
nuclear accident.”The EOD team used
dosimeters. The readings ranged from “very low” where the aircraft first hit
the ground to “much higher readings” where the crash came to a halt. The EOD
team found a CIAteam on the ground when they arrived at
Gander. The CIA team had to be have been on the ground when the crash
occurred and may have been the ones who set off the incendiary device on Arrow
Air 1285;
Canadian firemen who were not warned of the radiation exposure from the nuclear
backpack became sick from radiation exposure.[iii]

It's
not hard to believe that there was real anger among the Special Forcesteam.This was an extremely well trained and highly motivated military force
and the loss of three or more of their team members (the aircraft had six
wooden crateson board) had to go down hard.

Deveraux received an explanation of why a CIAmay have been at Ganderfor Richard “Rick” Sherrowwho had worked for the Army as a demolition
expert and “retired after some additional years of contract work for the CIA
and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms:

If
a U.S. military unit was engaged anywhere in the world in the covert transport
of a nuclear device, acting completely outside the usual and legal procedures
for nuclear shipments, special CIAand/or military teams would be placed at all
refueling stops along the flight path to deal with any contingencies which
might arise. [iv]

That’s
one explanation of why the CIAteam was at Gander.The other is that a CIA team may have been
ordered to detonate the incendiary devices planted on the aircraft.Whoever ordered the take down may haveconcluded that there was a high risk that
Special Forcesteam members would leak information on the
illegal covert operation to the media when they got back to the US.Family phone calls were made among some
member of the US force that their lives were at risk and a number suspected
that they could not get back to the US alive.This was an extraordinary mission that went bad with Special Forces team
member killed and the mission aborted; if made public, this would have had
severe political repercussion. Political repercussions would be their least
concerns since everyone involved in the deliberate destruction of Arrow Air
1285could be charged with murder.

Sergeant
Todd Jennings,
age 20, who was killed in the crash, wrote a poem to his mother were he cited
top secret terms “Lucifer Directive”
and “Omega Deception.”Deveraux contacted one of his confidential
military intelligence sources who “expressed amazement” that the young sergeant
had used such top secret terms.

One possibility is that Sgt. Jenningswould have recognized troopers wearing the
green Battle Dress Uniform (BDU) worn in Germany and elsewhere compared to the
Desert Camouflage Uniform (DCU) worn in the Saini.We know that the backpack nukes were stored
in Europe and Special Forceswere trained in their deployment as part of
the tactics to slow up an invasion from overwhelming Russian conventional
forces. There was no need for them in the Sinai and it’s unlikely that any were
kept in the peacekeeping arsenals.

Sgt.
Jenningsmay have known some of the incoming troopers
from jump school.We don’t know but
Sergeant Todd Jennings may have recognized one or more of the men as a member
of Task Force 160 and connected the dots to a covert operation.

The source told Deveraux that “Lucifer Directive”
was an order to deploy a “weapon of mass destruction” (clearly a nuclear bomb)
while “Omega Deception” meant “to shift the blame away from those who actually
used it.” Deveraux concluded that Sgt. Jenningsuse of these terms “seem to apply to [the]
covert mission to take out an Iraqi nuclear weapons plant.”[v]
It’s a logical conclusion.

TASK FORCE 160 IN THE SINAI

Deveraux discussed the terms “Lucifer Directive’” and “Omega
Deception” with Dr. J. D. and Zona Phillips, the parents of a son killed in the
plane crash and founders of Families for the Truth About Gander:

The
Phillips had assisted and appeared in the segment on the Gandercrash aired by “Unsolved Mysteries.”

A
high-ranking U.S. Army officer who had served in the Sinai Peninsulajust was visiting the Phillips in mid-July
1993 as a follow-up to the broadcast, probably dispatched by the Pentagon as
damage control.

Claiming
not to be familiar with an “Omega Deception,”
he at least did acknowledge to the Phillips knowing what a “Lucifer Directive”
is, although he declined to talk about it as “a national security matter.”

He
assured the Phillips, however, that there were “no nukes” in the Sinai
Peninsulain 1985, let alone on the Arrow Air flight.

Tash Force 160, moreover, was
not sent to the Sinai for covert operations purposes, he said, but simply to
improve the helicopter maintenance program of the multinational peace-keeping
force which had fallen into disarray.[vi]

As
Deveraux noted in follow-up with others familiar with the operations of this
unit, the 160th are trained for spook operations, not for improving
the maintenance levels of other Army helicopter squadrons. The high-ranking
Army officer’s attempt to lie about the use of the 160th in the
Sinai was total nonsense.Deveraux
provided examples of the effective use of the 160th in very hot
situations.These included their use
against Iranian gun boats in the 1987 Persian Gulf War, and in the firefight in
Mogadishu in October 1993.[vii]

General
David Nathan Steiner, a retired Israeli officer, told the story of an aborted
covert mission to use a nuclear weapon or “small nuke” to destroy an Iraqi
nuclear weapons facility and the crash at Ganderincluded a nuclear device on the aircraft
being returned to the US, according to Deveraux.Steiner told this story to friends in the
American Southwest in March 1994. He was killed in a plane crash in the Arizona
desert in August 1994.Before his death,
Steiner described the small nuke as looking like “a large flower pot” and
“extremely dirty, with some of the radioactive contamination even blowing
Iran’s way.”

Steiner’s description matches
the that of a B-54 Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM), a backpack nuke
carried by Special Forces:

For
25 years, during the latter half of the Cold War, the United States actually
did deploy man-portable nuclear destruction in the form of the B-54 Special
Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM).[viii] Special
Forcesused the delivery container pictured above to
protect bombs during parachute jumps. The container and the weapon inside were
extremely heavy, adding about 58 pounds to a parachutist load.

The
Special Forces team had the legal right to disobey an illegal
order to use a nuclear backpack without a presidential authorization under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). There’s no question that if
actions were taken by the team to deviate from orders to return on Arrow Air 1285,
they could have expected senior Army officers to threaten them with courts
martial. As it turned out, the suspicions of some that their lives were
at risk turned out to be accurate.

There
are connections between Vice President George H. W. Bush,
the NSC, the CIA, and the use of Arrow Air
charters to ferry weapons in the bellies of aircraft for the Contras and the
Iranians.This is speculative but it’s
not beyond reason for the former CIA Director to order the use of Special
Operations forces to use a nuclear backpack to blow-up an Iraqi nuclear
research facility as a quid pro quo
to the Israelis for their assistance in the guns-for-hostages’ exchange with
the Iranians, to offer an alternative to an Israeli bombing of the facility and
the risk of an expanded war in the Middle East.

The Islamic Jihadterrorists had the motive and access to the
Cairoairport to plant a bomb on Arrow Air 1285;
they could have planted the incendiary device, if it somehow became available
on the international arms market.However, Deveraux reported evidence of incendiary packets were found in
an airport dumpster at Cologne. That would support Devereux’s hypothesis that
non-Arabs planted the incendiary device and remotely blew-up the aircraft in
Gander.The threat of a leak to the media by Special
Forcesof the aborted covert operation to rescue
hostages and use a nuclear weapon in Iraq is possible, but it’s a stretch.
Covert operations are inherently dangerous. Special Forces are an elite, highly
skilled military organization. They had to know that casualties are inevitable
in any covert operation.Special Forces
could have leaked this information to a US or UK news bureau in the Middle
East; they didn’t have to wait until arriving in the US to do it. Still, this
wouldn’t prevent an order to destroy the aircraft at Gander to eliminate any
risk of leakage to the media.

CONGRESS STONEWALLED

The
family of Captain Kyle Edmonds of Hartsville, South Carolina, sought help for
Democratic Congressman Robin Tallon of South Carolina who had no problem with
running interference with the Republican administration to obtain answers about
the crash from an administration that seem willing to leave it to a split CASB
in determining what caused the crash of Arrow Air 1285 and the tragic death of
256 Americans.Tallon took make a
good-faith effort to solve the puzzle:he held a press conference; put the list of unanswered questions in the
Congressional Record; asked the House Armed Services Committee to hold a
hearing; appeared on the ABC news show 20/20; and persuaded 103 members of
Congress “to co-sign a letter to President George Bush to initiate a formal
investigation into the crash.

Tallon was unsuccessful in obtaining a clean copy of the FBI
report on Gander.The FBI report had 239
pages out of 280 pages redacted.At the
December 1990 Congressional hearings “the evidence suggested there was” a
systematic repression of the evidence.Congressman Tallon asked: “Why was the possibly of sabotage not
investigated by our government? Why was the U.S. government so willing to
accept the CASB’s version of events if there was so much evidence to the
contrary?”

GANDER, NEWFOUNDLAND, CRASH REMAINS A MYSTERY TO CANADIAN
AND AMERICAN PUBLIC (House of Representatives - July 20, 1989)[ix]

The
SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from
South Carolina [Mr. Tallon] is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr.TALLON. Mr. Speaker, I am coming before my colleagues today to
bring to their attention a serious matter that has been ignored by our
government for the past four years.

I
am talking about the tragic plane crash that killed 248 American Soldiers and 8
others at Gander, Newfoundland, in December
1985. We all remember that crash because it was the worst military crash in
American peacetime history. Canadians remember the crash because it was the
worst air disaster in their history.

The
official version of the crash states wing icing, mechanical failures, and human
error as the causes of the crash. The Canadian and United States Governments
continue to uphold this theory despite contradictory evidence indicating that
it could have been the result of a terrorist act.

Even
though it was a tragedy of terrific magnitude for both countries, the United
States Government deferred all responsibility for the official investigation
and report on the crash to the Canadian Government. And yet, the National
Transportation Safety Board, the U.S. Army, and the FBIdid investigate the scene.

Keep
in mind that we are talking about an U.S. civilian plane that was chartered to
carry American servicemen and women to an American destination.

At
the very least, the official report should have been a joint effort between the
Canadians and the Americans. I want to know why it was not.

Why
was there such a cynical disregard for the loss of American military lives by
the appropriate Federal agencies? And why has there been a callous reluctance
to respond to the families of these victims when they have asked U.S. agencies
for answers to their many questions?

Recently,
too many credible sources have spoken out in support of the theory that the
plane may have been the target of a terrorist attack. Allow me to give some
examples.

In
December 1988, the Canadian Air Safety Boardfinally released the official report which
ruled that the crash was caused by ice contamination. This conclusion was by no
means unanimous.

Four
of the nine members of the board released a dissenting opinion from which I
will quote:

.
. . We cannot agree--indeed, we categorically disagree--with the majority
findings . . . The evidence shows that the Arrow Air DC-8 suffered an on-board
fire and a massive loss of power before it crashed . . . The fire may have been
associated with an in-flight detonation from an explosive or incendiary device.

The
Airline Pilots Association which re-examined the flight recorder information
said that the Canadian report was based on `manufactured data.' I quote from
the association's report:

This
study, contracted by the Canadian Air Safety Board,
represents technical dishonesty at its highest.

Many,
many other allegations into the faulty investigation and possible coverup by
Canadian and American officials have been addressed in the press. I will list
just a few which have followed this story: U.S.A.
Today, the Army Times, Counter-Terrorism and Security Intelligence,
the Ottawa Citizen, the St.
Petersburg Times, and Jack Anderson.

It's
not only the press that is involved in getting to the bottom of this mess. The
Labor Party in Canada has charged that the Canadian Board is involved in a
coverup and has demanded a judicial review to include all available evidence
and testimony.

The
Pennsylvania Senate unanimously passed a resolution on June 28 of this year
calling for the United States and Canadian Governments to reopen the
investigation.

The
bottom line--the Gandercrash remains a mystery to the Canadian and
American public. Families of these soldiers have suffered too long and have
heard too much evidence to indicate that their government is either hiding
something from them or is just plain lying to them.

I
am submitting for the record a list of over 30 questions written by Mrs. Zona
Phillips, of St. Petersburg, FL, the leader of the group Families for the Truth
About Gander. I believe that the
appropriate U.S. Federal agencies should address these questions with candor
and clarity.

I
have also written to Secretary of Defense Richard Cheneyand Attorney General Richard Thornburghrequesting their full cooperation in answering
questions. I am submitting for the record a copy of these letters.

No
words can express my gratitude to Constance Farmer and Dana Edmonds, of
Hartsville, SC, for bringing this matter to my attention with a very detailed
and moving letter which I will also submit for the record. They lost their son
and brother Capt. Kyle Edmonds and it is for them and for the other families
that I am bringing this matter to my colleagues in Congress.

Mr.
Speaker, I include the following material:

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED
STATES,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, July 12,
1989.

Hon. Richard Cheney

Secretary of Defense

The Pentagon

Washington, DC.

Dear Dick:

Last week I had a disturbing visit from two constituents who
four years ago lost a family member in the tragic crash of the charter plane
over Gander, Newfoundland.

The mother and sister of Captain Kyle Edmonds have joined
with other families of the 248 peace-keeping soldiers of the 101st AirborneDivision who were also killed in an effort to
garner more information on the circumstances of the crash. Yet, to this date
they have received little response from the government.

Their demand for a full accounting of the investigation
comes after several independent investigations have yielded piece-meal, yet
substantial evidence which indicates that the plane was the target of a terrorist
mission.

Some of the most compelling arguments for this theory come
from four members of the Canadian Aviation Safety Board (CASB) who had
dissented from the Authority's official report stating that the crash was
caused by ice contamination and possibly flight weight and a balance problem.
These board members cite physical evidence of an explosion and additional
intelligence evidence of the involvement of the alleged terrorist group Islamic
Jihad.
A recent Washington Post column even opens the theory that the chartered plane
may have had some role in the events surrounding the Iran-Contra scandal.

Dick, I am sure that you agree that the relatives of these
soldiers deserve to have answers to such questions. It is the responsibility of
the government to provide a thorough explanation of the crash that killed their
loved ones.

I am requesting from you that the channel of communication
be opened between the D.O.D. and these people. It is the very least we can do
for the soldiers who died in that tragic crash.

Looking forward to working with you on this very sensitive
matter, I am

Sincerely,

Robin Tallon

Member of Congress

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES

House of Representatives

Washington, DC

July 13, 1989

Hon. Richard Thornburgh

Secretary

Department of Justice

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Thornburgh:

I am writing to you
regarding the tragic December 1985 crash of the chartered plane carrying 248
American soldiers in Gander,
Newfoundland.

Last week the mother and sister of Captain Kyle Edmonds, of
Hartsville, South Carolina, who died in the crash, visited my office. My
constituents along with the other families of victims have had little success
in obtaining information about the crash from the United States government.

Their determination to learn more about the crash has
intensified recently with allegations that point to the possibility that the
crash may have been caused by a terrorist act. The United States official
conclusion concurs with the report by the Canadian Air Safety Board (CASB) that the crash was caused by wing ice
contamination and a flight weight and balance problem. However, four of the
nine members of the CASB have dissented from their own report.

In addition, a recent Washington Post column further
suggests an association of the Gander crash with the Iran-Contra Scandal. In light
of these new allegations, the families of these soldiers deserve accessibility
to all relevant information about the death of their loved ones.

It is my understanding that the F.B.I. has a report that is
largely censored on the Gander crash. I am requesting the pertinent contents
of this report be made available to the families. At the very least, I expect
that the Justice Department will open the lines of communication with these
families and to work with them to see that their many questions are answered
once and for all.

Looking forward to working with you on this very critical
matter, I am

Sincerely,

Robin Tallon

Member of Congress

FAMILIES FOR TRUTH ABOUT GANDER

QUESTIONS
CONCERNING THE GANDER CRASH

1.
Why were air charters used rather than military craft? (Who makes that decision
and why is it done?)

2.
Why was there such lax security on the plane in Cairo and Cologne? (Why leave it to the charter for
security?)

3.
If charter flights are to be used why not fly them into military bases rather
than into regular airports?

4.
Why was the baggage security so lax?

5.
What was on the cargo manifest (what did the Army load on the plane)? Why
wasn't the cargo manifest released (members of the C.A.S.B. did not have it
made available to them.) What is the U.S. Army trying to hide? (What was in the
boxes?)

6.
How many passengers were onboard the Arrow flight? (One stewardess and pilot
who flew the Cairo to Cologne leg, stated that the plane was
full. The papers reported for some time after the crash 250 soldiers killed.
The autopsy reports listed 258 numbers assigned to bodies and there were two
bodies missing from their numbers. This was never adequately explained. Given
the time of year, before the holidays, it would seem logical the plane would be
full. The soldiers were waiting to get home and some would have been on
stand-by, in the event anyone, for any reason, did not take that flight. Where
is the passenger manifest?) Who were the other two people on the plane? (256 or
258?)

7.
Why did the plane stop in Gander to refuel? Isn't that an unnecessary
diversion? Was it to `tanker' fuel and save Arrow air money at the cost of the
U.S. Army? Why didn't they fill up in Cologne? Was it because the fuel there is
more expensive?

8.
Why wasn't the plane maintained more properly?

9.
Why all the delays in take-off time?

10.
Why weren't the ground crews and maintenance crews questioned in Cairo and Cologne? Who worked on the plane? Who had
access to the plane? Were they regular employees or terrorists? Was someone on
the plane that should not have been?

11.
Why did certain men write or call home and seem upset about something, before
the crash? What was wrong? What did they know?

12.
Why weren't more Arrow Air pilots questioned? Is it true that Arrow Air was
flying into Tehran and Honduras? What for? Were they shipping arms to Iran and
the Contras? Where did these arms come from? Were they stockpiled in the Sinai?
What was going on at the base in the Sinai?

13.
What was the C.I.D. officer bringing home with him? Why did the Pentagon change
their story on this man and say that he was only `touring' not assigned in the
Sinai, when he was in fact assigned there? Why were members of the 160th task
force in the Sinai?

14.
Why did Major [General] Crosby order the bulldozing of the crash site the day
after the crash, before all the fires were out and all the bodies had been
recovered? Was this ordered by the Pentagon? Did the C.A.S.B. or investigators
question this request?

15.
Why was Arrow Air representatives denied access to the crash site for 9 hours
after the crash? Why hasn't the C.A.S.B. commented on this? What was wrong at
the crash site they did not want them to see or know?

16.
What were the explosions at the crash site after the crash? If there was no
arms or explosives aboard, what was it?

17.
Why did this particular DC-8 have two additional fire bottles installed in the
wheel wells? Was it because the plane was hauling explosives?

17a.
Why were the F.B.I. forensic experts denied access to the crash site the entire
time they were in Gander? Why did the F.B.I. then say
all they did was fingerprint identification and yet they did conduct an
investigation (on what was a routine crash) and ask questions pertaining to
terrorism. A report was issued some 277 pages long with most blacked out. What
is all this about?

18.
Why did the C.I.D., D.I.A., C.I.A. and U.S. Army investigate? What did they
find? Where is their report? Why wasn't it given to the Canadian investigators
and the C.A.S.B.?

18a.
If the N.T.S.B. followed along behind the Canadian investigators why didn't
they issue a report. They deny one was done. Why didn't they share their
findings with the C.A.S.B.?

19.
The F.A.A., the D.O.T. the D.O.D. and others did investigations and reports.
Where are they? Why didn't the C.A.S.B. see these? Why all the secrecy if it
was a routine flight and ice or mechanical failure caused the crash?

20.
Why the cause of ice as the cause of the crash? There are twenty witnesses to
prove no ice. Weather readings were taken from data 200 miles away from Gander.
Planes that took off and landed before and after the Arrow crashed did not
de-ice. They did not crash.

21.
Why didn't investigators question people at the crash site? Why did they wait
days to do it? Why weren't all witnesses called to testify? Why did they treat
witnesses in such a casual manner and dismiss their testimony as statistically
unfounded? (imagination?)

22.
Why weren't ground crew personnel questioned at the public inquiry? Why weren't
their testimonies important? Was it because it had already been decided `ice'
would be used as the cause?

23.
Why were the claims of responsibility (by terrorists) for the crash, dismissed
by the U.S. and Canadian Governments before they investigated, two hours later while
the fires were burning? How could they know? Wasn't the claim made by one
caller even more astonishing, due to the fact he knew the plane was delayed in
Cologne? Why such an obviously fast denial? What were they hiding? Who else
besides the F.B.I. investigated this? Why did the State Department alert Egypt
Air after the crash telling them to watch out for terrorists? (Egypt Air flies
them from the camp to Cairo.)

24.
Who investigated the possibility of terrorism in Canada? What expertise do they
have in terrorism and bombs? Where is their report? Why didn't the C.A.S.B.
have access to it?

25.
Why was the critical evidence withheld from the C.A.S.B. board? (F.B.I. report,
autopsy report, cargo and passenger report, aerial photographs of the crash
site, and many others.) How can a thorough investigation be done like this? How
can it be done without the reports by the American agencies involved?
Especially a military plane.

26.
The autopsy reports that were done in Canada were based on questionable data.
Many leading forensic pathologists disagree on their findings. The
toxicological reports did not prove one way or another that there was or was
not . . . a precrash fire or explosion aboard the aircraft. Dr. Sheppard in
London, a leading forensic pathologist disagreed with A.F.I.P. findings and
those in Canada. His report was never considered. Much mystery and many
questions lie unanswered concernings the autopsy reports and the toxicology
reports.

27.
What happened to the cockpit microphone recording? Was it really turned off or
did they not want to reveal what was on it?

28.
Why did they fabricate the information given to Dayton, Ohio for computer
simulated studies? Were they still trying to prove the ice theory? (This has
been proven by the U.S. Airline Pilots Association, it was fabricated.)

29.
One fire bottle extinguisher was found to have been discharged before impact
and the master fire warning lights were found to be on at time of impact. Why
was this key piece of evidence excluded from the investigation? Didn't the fact
that the pilot had activated the fire extinguisher and turned on the fire
warning light tell them anything?

30.
If #4 engine did go in to reverse thrust after takeoff why did C.A.S.B.
investigators dismiss it? Why did they dismiss all the data on this theory that
fit the actual pattern of impact perfectly? Was it because they were afraid
that the manufacturers would then be involved in the investigation and discover
that an explosion caused the engine to go into reverse thrust?

31.
Why was Mr. Irving Pinkle's report dismissed outright? (He is a world renowned
explosives expert and N.A.S.A. specialist with startling credentials. Why
weren't the metal tests done that he ordered? Did R.C.M.P really expect to find
residue on the metal after the plane burned for 20 hours? The plane parts were
left in a hanger in piles. Mr. Pinkle still found a section of aircraft that
showed definite signs of an explosion. How could they not consider this if this
investigation was thorough? Why didn't they put the plane back together? Why
did they bury the wreckage before the investigation was completed? Why did they
haul plane parts to Scott Airforce Base in Illinois? Why didn't they tell
anyone about this? What did they do with these parts there? Where are the
reports on this? Why wasn't C.A.S.B. told? Why Scott Air Force Base? Is it
because it is M.A.C. headquarters? What reports did M.A.C. issue? Where did
they go? Where are the plane parts now?

32.
Why was the project to reconstitute the captain's air speed card, that was
found on the yolk in a burned condition cancelled in 1987 by the director of
investigation? Was he worried that the results would not fit his icing . . . ?

33.
If the plane landed as they said it did, rather than blow up, where were the
ground scars from the tail section and landing gear? They never found them. Why
was the tail section lying in a clump of trees with all the trees around it
standing perfectly straight? (If it landed as they said it did.) There was a
tree pierced through the tail section that was still standing straight. Part of
the fuselage was laying behind the tail section--doesn't that seem odd?

34.
In January of 1986, the Army came back and found another body. This after
stating that they had found everyone. They collected every scrap they could
find, put it all into bags and left. They never came back or were heard from
again. Why didn't the investigators examine all of this? In the Pan Am 103 they
examined every shred of evidence. They painstakingly checked every fragment.
They reconstructed everything they could. Why not in this case? What was
different about this crash, that it should have been handled in this way?

35.
Firefighters who worked at the crash site and became ill were studied and found
to have `post-traumatic stress disorder'. They suffer from headaches, nausea,
blood and liver problems, and yet they never tested their blood, urine or did
x-rays of these people. Why not? This study did nothing for these people nor
did it determine what might have been on the plane or caused the crash. Was this
another cover-up? You bet. If not this is one more doctored report.

36.
Why do the members of the Conservative Party and the Minister of Transportation
continually refuse to order a full `judicial inquiry' into the cause of the
crash? This was the worst crash in Canadian history. They have called for judicial
inquiries in past accidents they had the less loss of life. With the tremendous
amount of public pressure and political pressure on them to do so, you have to
wonder, why? The truth should fear no trial. The answers are obvious--cover-up.

37.
Why the lack of interest in our own Government? No one seems to care and no one
wants to be bothered. No one wants to know? They already know. Now we want to
know.

There
are many more questions. The mystery continues and more doubts surface daily.
As an American you have to ask yourself, why 256 Americans died in a foreign
land, possibly murdered, wouldn't the President want to know sooner than 3
years later? Would he leave it to the Canadians to muck around for all that
time to get the result? Or had it already been decided what the cause would be,
so the answers really did not matter . . . we believe so. One small statement
sums it up perfectly, `It was an orchestrated litany of lies and fabrication'.
(Quote: Mr. Ross Stevenson) This was a Canadian and American tragedy, that
became a Canadian and American disgrace. Why?

(Dr.
and Mrs. J.D. Phillips,
founders of Families For Truth About Gander.)[x]

CONCLUSION

Arrow Air 1285 was destroyed by a fire and explosion, not
icing as reported by both Canadian and US governments:

Scenario #1: Islamic terrorists (Islamic Jihad or others) destroyed the plane by a bomb
planted at the Cairo airport, where a 30-minute blackout occurred
during loading and where Egyptian luggage handlers were unsupervised by
Americans. One month after the crash, the American embassy in Mauritius
received a signed letter "Sons of Zion." It described how the Arrow Air jet was
"sabotaged" by "cold-blooded, premeditative act...a few hours
before take-off with the complicity of several Egyptian and Libyan
mechanics," according to Roy Rowan, Time,
April 27,1992. (Gene Wheaton’s
theory).

Scenario #2: The CIA destroyed the plane by remotely donating
incendiary devices and napalm planted in soda cans on the aircraft in
Cologne. The interior of the plane was
engulfed in flames almost immediately after take-off at Gander,
the apparent consequences of two bomb components in soda cans: those containing
explosive incendiary triggers adjacent to others holding napalm-like substance.
The detonation of the first instantly ignited and spread a deadly conflagration
throughout the body of the aircraft (Don Deveraux’s
theory).

Robert O'Dowd served in the 1st, 3rd and 4th Marine Aircraft Wings during 52 months of active duty in the 1960s. He teamed up with Tim King to write about the environmental contamination of two USMC bases (MCAS El Toro and MCB Camp Lejeune), the use of El Toro to ship weapons to the Contras and cocaine into the US, and the murder of Col. James E. Sabow and others who were threats to blow the whistle on illegal narotrafficking activity in Betrayal: Toxic Exposure of US Marines, Murder and Government Cover-Up (2014).